Can you shoot more accurate with a big or small caliber handgun?

If you enjoyed reading about "Can you shoot more accurate with a big or small caliber handgun?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!

Eric F

April 14, 2008, 03:12 PM

as physics goes a smaller bore should be more accurate but then again some one will argue that one out............

k_dawg

April 14, 2008, 04:25 PM

Flinching is probably the main reason why someone is more accurate with a smaller caliber

Snapping Twig

April 14, 2008, 04:35 PM

Maybe it's the guns involved, but I definitely shoot my 25-7 .45LC better than most of my other pistols, that said, my 627-0 is also a one ragged hole shooter.

I also have a Kimber custom CDP II that shoots a ragged hole, so that's 2 .45 cal pistols and one .357, so IMO, it's the particular pistol - all things being equal.

Dr. Tad Hussein Winslow

April 14, 2008, 04:48 PM

There's no mechanical/physics reason why larger or smaller would be more inherently accurate or inaccurate, but two things:

1. Due to less flinch (potentially), the smaller the better, as a practical matter, in the real world. .22s are easy to shoot well for this reason.
2. But, all other things being equal, it's easier to make one-hole groups with the *same number of shots* with a big bore. This is "cheating" because the C-T-C measurement will be the same, but the outer limits of the holes "reach" further in all directions, including toward one another - toward the center of the group. A "one hole group" *appears* a bit more impressive to the untrained eye.

theotherwaldo

April 14, 2008, 06:03 PM

I was curious about this, too, so I pulled out my Super Blackhawk .44 mag and Single Six .22lr, put up matching paper plates at fifty yards, and tried it out.

I did better with the .44. The gun is so heavy and comfortable that you feel like you could pull your hands back and just leave the gun in mid-air. Rock-steady.

The .22 isn't quite as long or heavy, so it's slightly harder to stabilize off-hand. It feels easier to shoot, but the results don't match.

my .02

CBS220

April 14, 2008, 06:08 PM

as physics goes a smaller bore should be more accurate but then again some one will argue that one out............

I'm not sure how you would prove or even justify this. Benchrest shooters would all be packing .17s and .20s instead of 6mms if this were the case, it seems.

Now, I'm not saying you're wrong, but I find that many people shoot a moderate to soft recoiling large bore handgun better than snappy, smaller caliber ones (.45 vs. .40, for instance).

As a matter of what it does to the target, we may as well debate the difference between being hit by a Uhaul or your UPS delivery man :p

tblt

April 14, 2008, 06:38 PM

Biger for some reason.
I really suck with a 22 and good with 9,40,45,357 magand 44 mag

cleardiddion

April 14, 2008, 06:42 PM

So far, of all the handguns I've fired (.22, .40, .45, .500, 9mm) I've had the best luck with a Glock 21 in .45. So I guess towards the bigger end.

Mousegun

April 14, 2008, 06:44 PM

The longer and more often you shoot larger cal guns like the 45, the less flinching becomes a problem.

I have been shooting 45's for a lot of years and would much rather shoot a 45 for score than a 22 who's holes are a lot smaller.

Of course the 45 of which I speak is a home built fully accurized specimen that can punch a 2" or less hole with 10 shots from a Ransom rest at 50 yards.

I have reached a point where I never flinch in anticipation of recoil.

kamagong

April 14, 2008, 06:51 PM

I shoot better with my Baer Concept II than I do with my Ruger 22/45. It doesn't really make sense, but it's true. It's probably a couple of things. 1911s point very naturally for me whereas the balance of the 22/45 is a bit barrel heavy. The Concept II also has an excellent trigger; the 22/45 not so much. I'm thinking of changing out some of the internals for Volquartsen parts.

The Annoyed Man

April 14, 2008, 06:59 PM

I shoot better with my 3" Kimber UCII than I do with either my H&K USP Compact .40, or either of my full sized 1911s. I shoot as well with my 5" Model 29 in .44 mag as I do with the Kimber. I shoot lousy with my Colt Government .380.

I don't own any .22 pistols, but I shoot worst with my smallest caliber pistol, the .380, and I shoot best with either a very small .45 or a very large .44. Does one of you want to give me a .22 pistol so I can find out how I would do?

:D

makarovnik

April 14, 2008, 08:00 PM

I shoot better with a bigger gun regardless of caliber. For me a longer sight radius and more "weighty" gun means better accuracy.

Elza

April 14, 2008, 08:06 PM

I do about the same with either for the most part (what ever that says. :o ). My best shooting is with my Smith 29.

The fact that I've put tens of thousands of rounds through my centrefire guns (former IPSC competitor) and only a few hundred through my rimfires may have something to do with this.

hockeybum

April 14, 2008, 08:45 PM

.357 snub nosed revolver is more accurate than .40 S&W. .40 S&W is more accurate than .45 para ordinance. I like the .357, I put the 5 shots into a 2 inch group.

gbran

April 14, 2008, 08:48 PM

38/357 Wadcutters out of a Blackhawk are about as good as it gets for me.

If you enjoyed reading about "Can you shoot more accurate with a big or small caliber handgun?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!